Report 1568
Special Report #1568 Skillset: Kata Skill: Stomp Org: Shofangi Status: Completed Dec 2007 Furies' Decision: Solution 1 Problem: Shofangi Stomp is now double gated, it requires surge as all kicks that can afflict do, and it requires either a prone or freshly boganj'd target. Now that stomp is directly competing with buck and heelslam for two stance slots it's hard to justify its use when it also requires sacrificing an arm action either in the current form or the form before. This report seeks to make stomp a more relevant choice for Shofangi. 0 R: 0 Solution #1: Remove the sprawl or boganj requirement from stomp. 0 R: 0 Solution #2: Solution 1 and change stomp thematically to be two hits, one that sprawls and one that causes the affliction. Replace the 2s eq loss on head with Clumsiness (to be in line with report 1663), replace the 2s bal loss with healthleech. Player Comments: ---on 4/4 @ 14:27 writes: I think solution 2, having it be a sprawl + affliction is the only way that stomp would possibly be chosen over another one of our kicks which is why I added it. I'm hoping that by removing the bal loss on the ability that it's not too strong but as always I'm open to hear opinions on this. ---on 4/8 @ 03:20 writes: Eh. Generally speaking, Nekotai kicks are weak, I know, and I'm thinking of buffing them myself, but I'm holding off while waiting for more information/data about how viable our aff rate etc is at the moment. I don't think the current stomp effects are weak for being double-gated, if anything the Shofangi kicks are all too strong - but I'm not here to tell you to nerf your class or anything, just to point out that I don't think stomp needs buffing - it can be a kick that you choose to use when you're already going to boganj or prone the target anyway - and be one that's not worth using in other scenarios - whereas the other two kicks can be worth using in all circumstances. Solution 2 is a definite no - sprawl is in itself a high value action, regardless of whether it is Surge or not, to sprawl AND give an affliction without any requirements or additional opportunity cost is too much. Solution 1 just changes stomp to be another kick that gives a choice of afflictions. As mentioned, I don't think it is needed, but is the only thing I can support. ---on 4/14 @ 12:51 writes: What on stomp do you think is worthy of being double gated when compared to buck and heelslam? And if we're getting into comparisons of Nekotai and Shofangi (which I'm not sure why we are): I am also not understanding the argument that sprawl is too valuable of an affliction to give out post surge when my understanding is your center stance gives it passively. ---on 4/15 @ 00:38 writes: I will concede that some parts of my previous comment was borne from a kneejerk reaction on hindsight. However, I do think that making stomp do prone+affliction is not wise. Let me try to articulate my thoughts better- To specifically answer your question: I think the current afflictions/effects given by stomp in themselves are worth being Surge gated alone. I agree that requiring a prone/boganj before it, is now too much, since it is surge limited - which would be the rationale behind why I previously said I can support solution 1. My previous comment that I don't feel it is needed is, on hindsight, not very valid - solution 1 is probably needed, yes. That said, all of the afflictions/effects in stomp would be worth it on their own - pretty much just like heelslam and buck: a surge kick that deals one aff (and in this case, a couple of which are balance knock effects). Changing the balance knocks into afflictions is fine, again, on hindsight, my previous comment that changing it isn't needed was too knee-jerk - but anyway, aren't balance knocks more valuable in this situation? Since Shofangi have access to quite a number of other kick afflictions, but no other kick with a balance knock. Of course, at the end of the day, it's up to you. Either way, however, I'm I don't think we should add a free prone on top of it. It would in turn make stomp just all-around better than buck/heelslam, which don't give an extra prone. ---on 4/15 @ 20:09 writes: That's fair enough. The main reason I bundled the sprawl change with changing the balance-knocks is I thought that sprawl AND a 2s balance/eq knock (basically 2s of guaranteed sprawl against a non acrobat) was too strong. I think the balance knocks are okay if they don't also come with a guaranteed sprawl which is why I didn't address them in sol. 1. ---on 4/18 @ 04:00 writes: Solution 1 is the simplest